11 ms·

this is one of the worst, most backward-looking, anti-innovative views of art today that i've ever encountered. i'm sure they'll make money on it, but i can't

this is one of the worst, most backward-looking, anti-innovative views of art today that i've ever encountered. i'm sure they'll make money on it, but i can't wait until the first rip of this 'unlistenable' album hits pirate bay. as a piece of 'institutional critique', the website/album/company itself is moderately interesting, but barely that since most of what they say regarding contemporary art, exclusivity, ephemerality, and Damien Hirst can be rather easily countered -- due to their tendency toward bombastic or hyperbolic statements without any evidence thereof. let's pay attention to people trying to make the world better and not this pseudo-intellectual, luxury circle jerk. also, terrible website & tired copy. http://scluzay.com/ http://scluzay.com/

dasil003 13y ago
If innovation is Spotify, where a given artist must have millions of active listeners before they can earn a lower-middle-class paycheck, then I don't see what value "innovation" has to music as an art form. The old music industry as gatekeepers may have exploited artists, but technology hasn't done anything to distribute they wealth; it's only lower the barrier to entry, but as a whole the industry has been devalued. Hip hop in particular has been the most devalued of all musical genres, and seen as a disposable fad for decades. Wu Tang is doing an experiment here, to put their foot down and say we are artists in the grandest tradition of old. It may be backward-looking, but it's backward-looking with real purpose and conviction, and something that no one else really has the balls to do. So while it may not use the latest technology and scratch that techno-fetigist itch we tend to have around here, it is absolutely one of the most interesting things happening today in the music world, and I wish them all success.
- jamespollack 13y ago
  Define value (specifically in relation to art, or music, or both). Define how something is 'devalued' (specifically to art, or music, or both)). Define who has 'devalued' the 'whole industry'. Define why hip hop has been the 'most devalued of all musical genres'. Then tell me how this gnostic priesthood giving us mere mortals a peek at 'the real thing' is going to give all that value back to hip hop. There's no technological fetish here, simply a desire to live today and avoid a historical fetish. I don't live in the Renaissance Era or in the 'Swinging Sixties'. It's 2014 and it's sad that this group of people find actually addressing the problem of relevance and value in our day and age too difficult and instead recycle old, problematic forms. Of all the arts, digital has probably helped music the most. Send me a link to the 'Art' section on the App store. Does Wu-Tang really need validation from the institutions (the academy, galleries, museums, etc) that they don't already have from the millions of people who listen to their albums and go to their shows? Do you honestly think that this showing is going to help those artists who want to earn a 'middle-class paycheck'??? Because it seems to me altogether unlikely that most artists will be able to afford to put on a multi-location, state-of-the-art-security presentation like this. C'mon, be realistic. 'Rarity' is only one component of aesthetic beauty. All of the other ones need to be there to give something value. Increasing the 'rarity' to maximum does not an art object make. Patronage is nice if you've got enough $$$$$$. Hope you get the chance to see the 'holy grail' in your lifetime. Start saving.
  - antiterra 13y ago
    Hip-hop didn't suddenly gain qualitative value when the first Rap Grammy was given, and that value didn't jump when they finally televised the award. But plenty of people still consider similar vehicles of industry and academia as important and authoritative, and that kind of institutional value and respect is exactly what RZA is seeking. I think this only reinforces the questionable authority and ability for inward facing groups like NARAS and AMPAS to anoint their own works as respectable. So, you're right objectively, but in the context of the systems the public supports, perhaps not.
- lmm 13y ago
  Only last weekend I was at a talk by Professor Elemental, who makes a living doing the kind of niche hip-hop that could simply not have existed ten or twenty years ago. You've got to remember that in the old days many people spent years unemployed or working low-end part-time jobs trying and failing to break into the music industry; there may be fewer superstars making millions these days, but there're vastly more people who, while they may be earning close to minimum wage, are now able to work full-time doing what they love, and I think the quality and variety of modern music reflects that. I think a lot of the great artists we look back on were more egalitarian than the "high art" of today. Beethoven's late quartets may have been commissioned by a prince for an enormous sum, but he took the time to do the piano arrangement himself so that commoners would hear the correct version. Shakespeare wrote for rich and poor together. Last year I went to an exhibition of Kuniyoshi's works, now regarded as great art - and they were woodblock-printed, stamped out and sold to ordinary folk for the same price as a bowl of noodles.

dasil003 13y ago

If innovation is Spotify, where a given artist must have millions of active listeners before they can earn a lower-middle-class paycheck, then I don't see what value "innovation" has to music as an art form. The old music industry as gatekeepers may have exploited artists, but technology hasn't done anything to distribute they wealth; it's only lower the barrier to entry, but as a whole the industry has been devalued. Hip hop in particular has been the most devalued of all musical genres, and seen as a disposable fad for decades. Wu Tang is doing an experiment here, to put their foot down and say we are artists in the grandest tradition of old. It may be backward-looking, but it's backward-looking with real purpose and conviction, and something that no one else really has the balls to do. So while it may not use the latest technology and scratch that techno-fetigist itch we tend to have around here, it is absolutely one of the most interesting things happening today in the music world, and I wish them all success.

jamespollack 13y ago
Define value (specifically in relation to art, or music, or both). Define how something is 'devalued' (specifically to art, or music, or both)). Define who has 'devalued' the 'whole industry'. Define why hip hop has been the 'most devalued of all musical genres'. Then tell me how this gnostic priesthood giving us mere mortals a peek at 'the real thing' is going to give all that value back to hip hop. There's no technological fetish here, simply a desire to live today and avoid a historical fetish. I don't live in the Renaissance Era or in the 'Swinging Sixties'. It's 2014 and it's sad that this group of people find actually addressing the problem of relevance and value in our day and age too difficult and instead recycle old, problematic forms. Of all the arts, digital has probably helped music the most. Send me a link to the 'Art' section on the App store. Does Wu-Tang really need validation from the institutions (the academy, galleries, museums, etc) that they don't already have from the millions of people who listen to their albums and go to their shows? Do you honestly think that this showing is going to help those artists who want to earn a 'middle-class paycheck'??? Because it seems to me altogether unlikely that most artists will be able to afford to put on a multi-location, state-of-the-art-security presentation like this. C'mon, be realistic. 'Rarity' is only one component of aesthetic beauty. All of the other ones need to be there to give something value. Increasing the 'rarity' to maximum does not an art object make. Patronage is nice if you've got enough $$$$$$. Hope you get the chance to see the 'holy grail' in your lifetime. Start saving.
- antiterra 13y ago
  Hip-hop didn't suddenly gain qualitative value when the first Rap Grammy was given, and that value didn't jump when they finally televised the award. But plenty of people still consider similar vehicles of industry and academia as important and authoritative, and that kind of institutional value and respect is exactly what RZA is seeking. I think this only reinforces the questionable authority and ability for inward facing groups like NARAS and AMPAS to anoint their own works as respectable. So, you're right objectively, but in the context of the systems the public supports, perhaps not.
lmm 13y ago
Only last weekend I was at a talk by Professor Elemental, who makes a living doing the kind of niche hip-hop that could simply not have existed ten or twenty years ago. You've got to remember that in the old days many people spent years unemployed or working low-end part-time jobs trying and failing to break into the music industry; there may be fewer superstars making millions these days, but there're vastly more people who, while they may be earning close to minimum wage, are now able to work full-time doing what they love, and I think the quality and variety of modern music reflects that. I think a lot of the great artists we look back on were more egalitarian than the "high art" of today. Beethoven's late quartets may have been commissioned by a prince for an enormous sum, but he took the time to do the piano arrangement himself so that commoners would hear the correct version. Shakespeare wrote for rich and poor together. Last year I went to an exhibition of Kuniyoshi's works, now regarded as great art - and they were woodblock-printed, stamped out and sold to ordinary folk for the same price as a bowl of noodles.